This is great to hear, @BlakeFoster! Thanks so much for taking the time to write about your experience. It means a lot! It seems like im headed in the right direction and it’s great to hear that you enjoyed the program and saw noticeable gains. I have never done any structured training before so I’m looking forward to seeing how it helps me. 

@Billy Mantani the Base builder plus plan is one Tim and Kathy’s best plans in my opinion (it’s my go to winter plan and I usually end up repeating the 2nd and 3rd blocks to take me well into the spring). It will get you a good base after the first block and then build strength and pointy end stuff after that. 

Matt Budofsky said:

 

The more you train the more you’ll figure out what works best for you in the ways of being fun, keeping you motivated, and maximizing gains- don’t be afraid to play around with it!

This is probably the #1 thing with all riding/training/living.  

I'll add that having a computer/head unit to take in data and auto-upload into a training program can make a difference here.  A big one (capture speed, power, cadence, HR, etc).  Don't think about it too much at any time, but as the data accrues, you can, even with minimal effort, start to see trends.  What you're doing with all training is correlating how you feel, both on and off the bike with the effort you just did and are currently in the midst of to better prepare for the next effort.  

Some people tend toward over-training, some toward under-training.  Knowing how to work with your desires and sensations is ultimately how you enjoy the most and get the most out of what you do.  

@Matt Budofsky I Love hearing all of this! I'm going to go ahead and get the base plus plan going. And I love hearing your thoughts on the group rides. I'm here to gain performance and see where that can take me, but ultimately I just love having fun on my bike and hanging with like-minded people! Thanks for taking the time to give me your advice! It's much appreciated!

@mugwump Thanks so much this is all great info! I do have a wahoo with speed, HR, and cadence sensors. Do you think this is a good start or should I implement power at the beginning too? Would it help to see my improvement in power from the beginning in your opinion? Again, thanks for taking the time to offer up some advice! Much appreciated!

Power is very, very helpful and makes things much easier to follow (and a necessity if you're doing this stuff on Zwift).

My old school, pre-power days on a dumb trainer was to have a set gear and cadence and hold it for the duration of the set. HR and perceived exertion over a set length of time would be the variables I'd measure. It wasn't an exact science, but it is helpful in measuring your macro fitness over the course of a season/year.

But if you can swing it, power meters make everything super easy. 

@David Yangthanks! I don’t think it’s much of an upgrade for my bike to get a power meter added. I’ll look into it and see if it’s something I can just swing from the start. Appreciate the insight! 

Billy Mantani said:

@mugwump Thanks so much this is all great info! I do have a wahoo with speed, HR, and cadence sensors. Do you think this is a good start or should I implement power at the beginning too? Would it help to see my improvement in power from the beginning in your opinion? Again, thanks for taking the time to offer up some advice! Much appreciated!

In general, if the price isn't a problem, then, yes, I'd recommend a power meter.  Power is the metric that matters second most to Perceived Exertion (though this can't be quantified).  (though you want to make sure the power meter calibration is consistent, which is now pretty easy).  The others are more like proxies.  It's easier to train by power, it's easier to figure out if you're on a good day or not with power, it's easier to do intervals with power.

To me, one of the biggest things is figuring out if something is hard or I'm not feeling good.  With HR you can get a sense, but with power you know it fast.  

@mugwump thanks so much. This is extremely helpful. I never really thought about it the way you are explaining it and it totally makes sense. I really appreciate all the time you took to write that out for me! 🙏

Continuing thoughts on a power meter.

getting your FTP right is somethign that benefits training.  But you generally need to test to do that.

FTP tests are hard.  20m maximal effort is something that is hard to gauge.  You can look at Strava and figure out an estimate of what you're capable of without a power meter and then reference that when you have an actual power meter on your bike.  But, the difficulty is riding it to your maximum.  On your first try, you will almost certainly either go to hard too soon and fall apart at the end, or you will hold something back and realize with three minutes to go that you went too easy, and not reach your max.  You generally need the experience and insight from getting it wrong to then take a second shot to get the number closer to what you're capable of in a race situation.  

The Zwift Ramp test is very, very good for testing FTP, especially for a new athlete. You just go until you cannot - you don't need the experience that a 20 minute max effort requires.

Jules said:

The Zwift Ramp test is very, very good for testing FTP, especially for a new athlete. You just go until you cannot - you don't need the experience that a 20 minute max effort requires.

Totally agree. The ramp test has a bad name amongst some coaches because it’s not seen to be as accurate as a 20 minute test, but for newish power meter users it’s a better measure because it’s just easier to do it right.

@LennartZandbergen @Jules

I haven't read that yet. Why?  Do they think it will over- or under-estimate FTP?  

There's an argument that some coaches throw out there that it favors people who are good at short aerobic efforts since in reality the last 5 minutes are truly the hard part of the test, so the number will be artificially higher.

I typically end up testing about once a month and if the weather is good its a 20 minute test up 9w and if the whether is bad its a ramp test on Zwift and my data is basically the same. Maybe a watt or two more on one verse the other, but well within the margin of error for the power meter itself, so it really comes down to preference. I think the pacing of a 20 minute test I think makes that a bit more technical and strategic (do you want to try to negative split, keep it the same the entire time or go out hard and hang on for dear life?), but I think the mental aspect of a ramp test is harder (being indoors, not having the same kind of natural movement as you would outside and knowing you're about ride straight into a wall of lactic acid)  

Really all these are estimates and the best is ride as hard as you can for an hour or there abouts.  Something like a TTE test is great too because you then add a variable time aspect to it.  

Ramp tests typically over estimate FTP for exactly as Matt suggested - it favors using anaerobic systems.  This isn't great for newer riders (or anyone really) since a higher FTP will just mean unsustainable fatigue accumulation and, unless you have a coach to talk to or who can catch that, it's often unlikely a new rider will know they could be just as productive at a lower effort.  

@GregHoge @Matt Budofsky @Jules

Would it be fair to use the ramp for the first time, and then use the number for a 20m test, maybe by shooting for 5% less for the first 10m and evaluating what to do for the next 10?

Hey All!

@mugwump I did my test today and I think I had pretty decent results due to our conversation yesterday about how to gauge your effort for the 20 min. Thanks for that! I did tHR really, because I did not get the power meter in yet, but the basecamp training has me do it the same way. I honestly didn't feel as though I had much left at all at the end, maybe a little, but definitely not much haha. I really liked their notes about riding the first 5 minutes at just below what you think your tHR is so that is what I did for the first 5 minutes and then ramped it up a notch for the last 15. I'll have to compare it to a test I do in a month or so, and with the power meter. But, I don't think I would have done it differently in terms of effort. Thanks to our chat! Thank you!

I haven't tried these other tests, but they all sound interesting. @GregHoge seems like riding for as hard as you can for about an hr makes the most sense, as that is what this test (for power or HR) is supposed to represent anyway right?. Would be fun to compare the two.

@mugwump I think that's a good idea if you are just starting out.  If you have enough data to go off of, you can use your best 20min power.

@Billy Mantani more or less, yes.  Some people like to get semantical about what FTP represents but at the end of the day it's really just one number, and that number should mean something for you goals.

Want to increase endurance? A longer time/testing interval would be better.  Racing crits with lots of surges? You'll need a higher VO2 max and good repeatability, FTP matters a bit less than things like pack riding skill.

Since you're just at the beginning of your journey, volume is king.  The more you can ride (and more importantly, recover from that riding), the more gains you will see.

@Billy Mantani

I'll also add that an hour all-out, solo, in training is incredibly hard.  It's something that you'd want to build up to, and then use sparingly. 

Agreed with Greg and JP that volume, bike handling and building that race knowledge are the real essential things for hard group rides/racing.

At the end of the day FTP is just a benchmark to track progress. Sometimes you'll have a good day on test day, other times you'll have bad days and other other times you'll have run of the mill days, so don't let it dictate every last detail of training

Quick notes, probably repeating some of the above, this is all specially recent, having gone thru the basecamp program with Tim Cusick et al.

• The best way to figure out FTP is to do the 20 minute test.
• A few reasons for this: Actually riding for 60 minutes is hard from a route perspective, but also would take a ton to recover from (easier to recover from the 20 minutes, so you can go back to working out earlier)
• The 20 minute test should be preceded by a 5 minute effort (the 5 minutes can be, but doesn't need to be all out) -- this helps mitigate using the anaerobic engine. That is: Warm up, 5 minutes hard ish, 10 minutes easy (eat/drink), 20 minutes test (LFG), cool down.
• The FTP estimate is 95% of the 20 minute effort.
• Tim had specific suggestions on how to figure out a range (rather than one set FTP number), this is easy if you done a race or TT type effort a week or so before or after the test
• Related: FTP test results can be location dependent. That is, the number you get on Bear Mountain, or in Prospect Park, or indoors, will vary, and as mentioned, how rested, weather, etc, will have an effect too.
• The test is a workout -- it should be the only real effort you do that day 
• As mentioned, FTP is just one metric. As amateurs raising FTP and creating a good base will usually increase your chances of a good result, regardless of event type.
• Once you've build a strong base, focusing on the specifics of the event or events you want to do, will increase your chances much more and dramatically
• Tim had a Power Pace calculator that helped us on how to pace the 20 minutes (just make a copy and enter your own target number)

Let's go race bikes!

@eloy  That's a pretty cool calculator.  I copied it and saved it on my machine.

It's essentially a negative split pacing scheme.  

Old school PP ftp method is to do 2 laps all out starting from just before the zoo and considering the top of the hill as the actual start stop. Rest and soft pedal for one lap and then do another 2 laps. Cool down for a lap or two before heading home. That should take just about an hour.

You can also hit the front of a PP race.  The chasing peloton makes for good motivation and you might end up getting something out of it.  /s.  (Unless it fits your race goals.)

@mugwump @eloy @Matt Budofsky @David Yang thanks for all the details on this! Everyone insight is much appreciated! 
@GregHoge the volume makes sense. Good thing spring is just about here! 🙌

All great advice from the masters! I will just add that new AI FTP detection available in Trainnerroad, FasCat and other training platforms (extrapolated from recent rides) completely eliminates the stress of regular testing which suits my bad test taker profile. As everyone notes, FTP is just a number. It's main practical importance is to accurately set power ranges for different zones when training. If it's set too high, your threshold and VO2 efforts will be especially hard, if not impossible, to execute and you won't be able to spend the time you need in those zones to successfully adapt. I'm more than happy to skip the monthly ramp test or 20 minute test once a month now and do a focused workout, instead. There are other ways to puke in a bucket besides a ramp test!

I expect the AI detection to be brutally inaccurate in 2024 or for a while. Testing is a workout, do the 20 minutes (preceded by 5 minutes) instead.

I would love to see how, and will expect AI advances in this area, if you have done honest workouts that include 15, 20, 30 minute efforts, then AI can be super accurate, (but then, you don't need AI, anyone can estimate it) --- but if you don't go hard, or you go hard on the bike w/out a power meter, and the jump on the power meter, it just not gonna work very well, at least for a while. 

I have been using ai ftp detection for a year with TrainerRoad and have found it highly accurate and corresponds cert closely  to my ramp tests within 1-2 watts. If it was way off I would know doing 4 minute vo2 repeats!

Here is some more info on it: https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/ftp-testing-is-a-thing-of-the-past-introducing-ai-ftp-detection/

AdamYaffe said:

I have been using ai ftp detection for a year with TrainerRoad and have found it highly accurate and corresponds cert closely  to my ramp tests within 1-2 watts. If it was way off I would know doing 4 minute vo2 repeats!

Here is some more info on it: https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/ftp-testing-is-a-thing-of-the-past-introducing-ai-ftp-detection/

awesome!

digging just a bit, that would suggest that the AI detection is overestimating, as ramp tests typically overestimate.

When I built the Equinox streaming app, one of the things we quickly realized is that if you gonna give the user data, specially if it is an estimate, you want to make it optimistic… 

you see this bluntly across the industry… strava calories burned are higher than the straight kj formula, zwift avatars cover just a little more distance at a tick more speed than real life, whoop will count some bed time as sleep even if you were awake, etc etc etc

that said, if you take away one piece from my response please let it be: “awesome”

eloy said:

you see this bluntly across the industry… strava calories burned are higher than the straight kj formula, zwift avatars cover just a little more distance at a tick more speed than real life, whoop will count some bed time as sleep even if you were awake, etc etc etc

So you're saying my 25mph average on 200 watts in Zwift is not accurate?!  Blasphemy!